NRA Supporters are having hysterical fits over a photo of President Obama surrounded by children who wrote him letters regarding the Newtown school massacre. They ridiculously accuse the president of using the children as "human shields" to "advance his agenda". Their outrage rings hollow, however. After all, when the NRA used President Obama's children as human shields in its most recent commercial, its supporters did not raise a cry about using Sasha and Malia Obama as props.

There is a key difference between the use of the Obama children and the letter-writing children who were photographed with the president,by the way: the letter writers were photographed willingly. They WANTED to meet President Obama, and their parents gave consent for them to be photographed in this manner. On the contrary, the NRA shamelessly exploited Sasha and Malia Obama without their knowledge or consent. After all, the girls were not asked if they wanted to appear in a commercial for the NRA. That important distinction seems to have escaped both the NRA and its supporters.

It should also come as no surprise to many to find out that this was not the first time the NRA has used children as human shields to push a political agenda. In 2008, the NRA aired a campaign commercial (linked below) targeted at efforts to defeat President Obama and elect John McCain. Where were the protests from NRA supporters when THIS commercial aired? Why didn't we hear them yelling about "human shields", "child abuse" and "props" then?